incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Mclean <>
Subject Re: [IMPORTANT] Board proposal on podling releases
Date Thu, 13 Jun 2019 09:53:19 GMT

> I think that serious = release blocker;

That would also be my meaning. People / podlings have requested that release blockers be allowed
in podling releases.

> I'd love to hear some examples. I suspect they are all legal.

Sure some recent examples (without mentioning any pooling name, but I can supply links if
you want):
- Including code license under a category B license
- Including code under an unknown license
- including code under a permissive license, which required you to include the copyright and
license text, but not including that text anywhere (LICENSE file or file header)

The last one is probably the most common, especially with Javascript when license headers
seem to be optional. Any project including jQuery or Bootstrap immediately encounters this
as they have embedded 3rd party code without license headers.

We’ve allowed all of these situations, although I can also point to Category B inclusions
where we have not allowed them.

We’ve also allowed GPL dependancy and I think GPL inclusion (would need to check) with VP
legal/VP incubator OK on a once off basis a while back. The provision being that it was fixed
next release.

All of those would be against the terms of the license, which I assume you mean by legal?
Or do you mean something else by that term?

> I'd definitely like to see change. My feeling is that there's a lot we can
> make that falls comfortably within the scope of the Incubator PMC.

As Roman also suggested, we should discuss this with the legal committee and come up with
a list to give podlings clearer guidance.

> IIRC the release policies came out of the Incubator; I don't recall there being a
> request for the board to ratify them, but I might be failing to remember
> something a decade+ ago :)

From several discussion it been made clear that we don’t own them, the board does. Interesting
enough this say legal affairs does [1] when we’ve also been told they don’t. :-) In some
cases there's been a nice triangle, where legal, infra and the board all say it someone else
responsibility but not the incubators :-)

> By that are you suggesting that the text implies a guarantee that those are
> the only issues? 

 Issues can be found in the IPMC vote not the podling vote, so some of these serious issues
won’t be listed in the disclaimer when the IPMC votes on it.



To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message